Florida's editorial boards are good at wringing their hands.

The hand-wringing of newspaper editorial pages continues over the promised demise of the Department of Community Affairs, the State’s growth oversight agency. Of course, the media lied through their teeth about Amendment 4, and now it’s back to business as usual.



One break from the usual bad news, Floridians have a unique opportunity to give themselves and future generations a remarkable gift. A proposal is being floated to turn 150,000 acres north of Lake Okeechobee into a refuge. Read more at:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/turning-ranches-into-one-big-refuge-1218687.html



Let’s all do our part and make sure this happens. Please send your comment before February 28 to: Cheri Ehrhardt, Natural Resource Planner, Everglades Headwaters Proposal, PO Box 2683, Titusville, FL 32781


Do you really want to see the entire state of Florida paved over?


On another note: Here’s the latest study proving that growth doesn’t pay its way. (Yes, it’s true, even though the people in power continue to claim otherwise.)


Growth and Prosperity


Public policy often based on unsupported assumptions



By Eben Fodor



Most cities in the U.S. have operated on the assumption that growth is inherently beneficial and that more and faster growth will benefit local residents economically. Local growth is often cited as the cure for urban ailments, especially the need for local jobs. But does the empirical evidence show that growth is actually providing these benefits?



Local metro areas follow the general conclusions of this study. MSA stands for Metropolitan Statistical Area.

To test claims about the benefits of local growth, I examined the relationship between growth and prosperity in U.S. metro areas. This study looked at the 100 largest U.S. metro areas (representing 66 percent of the total U.S. population) using the latest federal data for the 2000-09 period. The average annual population growth rate of each metro area was compared with unemployment rate, per capita income and poverty rate using graphical and statistical analysis.





The “conventional wisdom” that growth generates economic and employment benefits was not supported by the data. The study found that those metro areas that have fared the best had the lowest growth rates. Even metro areas with stable or declining populations tended to fare better than fast-growing areas in terms of basic measures of economic well-being.



Some of the remarkable findings:



• Faster-growing areas did not have lower unemployment rates.



• Faster-growing areas tended to have lower per capita income than slower-growing areas. Per capita income in 2009 tended to decline almost $2,500 for each 1 percent increase in growth rate.



• Residents of faster-growing areas had greater income declines during the recession.



• Faster-growing areas tended to have higher poverty rates.



The 25 slowest-growing and 25 fastest-growing areas were compared. The 25 slowest-growing metro areas outperformed the 25 fastest-growing in every category and averaged $8,455 more in per capita personal income in 2009. They also had lower unemployment and poverty rates.



Another remarkable finding is that stable metro areas (those with little or no growth) did relatively well. Statistically speaking, residents of an area with no growth over the nine-year period tended to have 43 percent more income gain than an area growing at 3 percent a year. Undoubtedly this offers a ray of hope that stable, sustainable communities may be perfectly viable — even prosperous — within our current economic system.



While certain businesses prosper from growth, apparently the balance of the community does not. The statistics showing that fast-growing areas tend to have lower and declining incomes, indicate that any gains by the businesses that directly benefit from growth are more than offset by losses to the rest of the local population. In other words, a small segment of the local population may benefit from faster growth, but the larger population tends to see their prosperity decline.



This study was not an attempt to explain all the complex relationships that exist, but merely to test whether there is a correlation between growth and some of the benefits that are so often attributed to it. More research is clearly needed on this important topic.



Population growth tends to be directly linked to urban growth. There is a close, linear relationship between the two, as more people require more housing units and more commercial buildings for employment and shopping.



Public policies and plans regarding urban growth typically involve tradeoffs between economic, environmental and social impacts. Local residents may view a policy to encourage land development or growth as negatively affecting their quality of life through increased traffic congestion, environmental quality impacts, loss of farm and forest lands and loss of amenity values (such as tranquility, sense of community and open space). They may also be concerned about higher taxes to fund the cost of the new public infrastructure (roads, schools, sewer and water systems, etc.) required to serve growth. However, the prospect that new growth will bring jobs and economic prosperity that may benefit local residents is often viewed as compelling enough to outweigh these costs.



So if growth is actually not providing these benefits, then the decision-making balance shifts towards the fiscal, environmental and quality-of-life impacts. With greater awareness of the relationship between growth and prosperity, perhaps we will see a shift in our focus toward making our cities better places, not just bigger places.



Most U.S. cities have been actively pursuing growth with all the policy and financial tools at their disposal under the presumption that they are fostering local prosperity. As U.S. cities seek a path out of the recession, this study suggests that new economic development strategies will be needed that do not rely so heavily on growth.



A link to the full study, “Relationship between Growth and Prosperity in 100 Largest U.S. Metropolitan Areas,” can be found at http://www.fodorandassociates.com/


Eben Fodor is the principal of Fodor & Associates, a consulting firm based in Eugene and specializing in studying the fiscal, economic, and environmental impacts of urban growth and land development. This independent research was funded by Fodor & Associates as a public service.

Where was this editorial board before the election?

Amendment 4 would have given Florida residents that seat at the table.,

http://www.pnj.com/article/20110124/OPINION/101240301/Room-at-the-table-
Room at the table?


January 24, 2011

Gov. Rick Scott last week continued his campaign mantra about bringing jobs to Florida, and was echoed by legislative leaders. We're with them.

But not if they intend to give away the store.

Speaking to reporters and editors in Tallahassee last week, Scott said "my job is to sit down with business leaders every day and figure out how to make this the No. 1 state for jobs."

Meanwhile, House Speaker Dean Cannon said the Legislature needs to "streamline or eliminate" regulation.

That's all fine — depending on how you do it.

Today, the landscape of Escambia County is dotted with the results — many of them called Superfund sites — of a previous era when business was allowed a free hand so long as it brought jobs.

The result? Toxic chemicals in our groundwater; chemicals from "treated" industrial waste in bottom sediments of our rivers and bays, and in fish and other marine life; polluted stormwater that still kills seagrasses and make bays, bayous and creeks unfit for swimming or fishing; and pollutants like mercury and ozone-causing chemicals that filled our air from smokestack emissions.

No doubt Scott and Cannon would say they don't mean repealing environmental regulations that prohibit dumping toxic chemicals into our groundwater, letting industry pollute our bays or making our air dangerous to breathe.

And we believe they aren't talking about going back to the kind of development that led to the near-destruction of the Everglades, a mistake we are spending billions of dollars to fix today.

So what, exactly, do they mean?

Because how much "friendlier" can Florida get?

The Orlando Sentinel reported last week that according to a New Jersey analyst — BizCosts.com — Florida is already one of the most business-friendly states in the nation. Florida put five cities into the company's list of 20 cheapest places to do business; no other state had more than one.

"Florida is one of the most pro-business states in the nation," a company spokesman said, based on labor costs, taxes, utility costs and travel expense.

Meanwhile, the non-profit Tax Foundation puts Florida in its top 10 (fifth) for best business tax climates for 2011. "It is obvious that the absence of a major tax is a dominant factor in vaulting these ten states to the top of the rankings," its report states.

So when Gov. Scott and Speaker Cannon sit down to talk about how to improve Florida, we hope business interests aren't the only ones at the table. The rest of us deserve a place, too.

"They want a developer-friendly planning commission to run interference for them."

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2010/nov/29/activists-fear-developer-bias-on-planning-commissi/news-breaking/
Activists fear developer bias on planning commission

By MIKE SALINERO

The Tampa Tribune

Published: November 29, 2010

TAMPA - When the Florida Legislature created the Hillsborough City-County Planning Commission in 1959, the idea was to have an independent board, free of political pressure, to make recommendations on land-use changes.


But recent appointments to the commission and a new chairman have tilted the board toward a pro-development bias, neighborhood activists and environmentalists say.

Recommendations by the planning board under its current make-up, the critics say, will encourage county commissioners to approve sprawling development in remote rural areas, burdening taxpayers with costly infrastructure and paving over more of the county's rural land.

"We need an extra-independent, objective planning commission to vet changes to the comprehensive plan and zoning changes before they come to the county commission," said Mariella Smith, growth management chair for the local Sierra Club. "But the system has been hijacked to service developers and gives cover to those commissioners who are in the developers' pockets."

The two most recent appointees to the planning commission, Brian Hollands and Ray Young, are a case in point, Smith and other activists say. Hollands is business development manager at Hillsborough Community College, but was formerly in commercial real estate. Young is a Plant City contractor.

Community activists had hoped county commissioners would pick either Vivian Bacca, a Brandon resident active in United Citizens Action Network, or Barbara Dowling, a member of the of the Keystone-Odessa Civic Association. Both U-CAN and the civic association have resisted developments outside the county's urban service area, the limit beyond which water, sewer and other urban services are unavailable.

However, commissioners didn't discuss candidates in the meeting.

Further fueling the activists' ire was the revelation last week that county commissioner Al Higginbotham used developer attorney Vin Marchetti to interview planning commission hopefuls, including Hollands and Young.

Marchetti is considered one of the most powerful and influential land-use attorneys who regularly appear before the planning commission, Smith said, and is often hired by developers when their projects face strong neighborhood opposition.

Marchetti said he saw nothing unethical about his interviewing potential planning commission members. But former planning board chair Jan Smith said Marchetti's involvement is further proof the planning commission is now gliding down a "growth at any cost" path.

Hollands, who has a marine biology degree, said he doesn't share the activists' view of a planning commission split between developers and environmentalists.

"I think the whole us-versus-them mentality is really counter-productive to begin with," Hollands said. "We all live in houses and those houses have to be built by developers. We all eat food that's grown on farms. We need farms and we need open space."

Nevertheless, Hollands and Young, the other new appointee, were part of the 6-4 majority that three weeks ago elected developer Edward Giunta II as the new planning commission chairman. Giunta replaced five-term chairman Bruce Cury, considered by neighborhood groups as a "smart growth" advocate who opposed expanding the urban service area.

Of the remaining seven commission members, three are developers or engineers.

Asked if the planning commission has grown more pro-development, Giunta sidestepped the question, saying instead the board is more fiscally conservative. The commission's budget for fiscal year 2011 is $4.25 million, down from $5.9 million in 2008.

But the new chairman said the commission spends too much paying consultants to write studies on transit, sustainability and other issues having nothing to do with the commission's core duty of overseeing the comprehensive plan. The studies can cost as much as $25,000.

The new chairman vowed to reduce the $29,000 the commission spends on the annual community design awards banquet to $5,000. The difference will be covered by ticket sales and corporate sponsorships, he said.

He also wants to end the planning commission's role in shepherding community based planning, the process by which residents develop rules for guiding growth and protecting the character of their neighborhoods. Giunta would hand the process over to the county's Planning and Growth Management Department.

The plans are popular with activists such as Mariella Smith, who won an award from the American Planning Association for her work on the Ruskin Community Plan. But to Giunta, they are a waste of money. A typical community plan takes two years of planning commission staff time, he said, while less than a dozen residents participate.

"We shouldn't call them community plans," he said. "They're activist plans."

Ken Hagan, often regarded as a development-friendly county commissioner, said his votes in favor of development projects were often based on recommendations by the planning commission.

"The planning commission recommended every one of the developments that the board is being accused of approving and creating sprawl," Hagan said. "I don't know if it's really possible for the planning commission to be more pro-growth than it already is."

In some cases, such as the proposed Mill Bayou development on the Little Manatee River, county commissioners rejected the project despite a recommendation for approval by the planning commission staff.

Hagan's point is well-taken, Mariella Smith said, but she points out that county commissioners appoint four of the 12 planning commission members. The other six voting members are appointed by the cities of Tampa, Plant City and Temple Terrace.

Giunta is a Tampa appointee and Frank Chillura, also a developer and property manger, was appointed by Temple Terrace.

So politicians, whose campaign war chests are brimming with developers' dollars, appoint developer-friendly planning commissioners.

"Then the politicians can say, 'We're only approving what the planning commission approved,'" Smith said. "They want a developer-friendly planning commission to run interference for them."

Mike Salinero

(813) 259-8303

All they had to do was tell the truth.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/localgovernment/judge-rules-against-city-in-st-pete-beach-development-dispute/1136979

Judge rules against city in St. Pete Beach development dispute
By Sheila Mullane Estrada, Times Correspondent

Monday, November 29, 2010

ST. PETE BEACH — A voter-approved comprehensive plan — the legal guide for all development and redevelopment within the city — has been declared invalid.

Pasco-Pinellas Circuit Court Judge David Demers ruled against the city Wednesday in a long and bitterly fought case.

The case, along with others pending, mirrors much of the recent debate over a state constitutional amendment that would have required voter approval of local comprehensive land use plans. Called "Hometown Democracy" by its supporters, Amendment 4 was defeated by voters in November.

St. Pete Beach has spent nearly a half million dollars in legal fees so far to fight the suits against it. Now it appears the city may be forced to spend even more to reimburse resident Bill Pyle for the costs he incurred in fighting the development regulations approved by voters in 2008.

His attorney, Ken Weiss, said Sunday those fees are "well in excess of $100,000" but "a fraction" of what the city has spent.

"Yikes," said St. Pete Beach Mayor Mike Finnerty. "This is truly an unfortunate situation for St. Pete Beach. The city is in dire need of redevelopment. I don't know where this ruling puts us."

The ruling involves four ordinances approved by voters that changed the comprehensive plan, particularly as it applies to redevelopment of the aging hotel row along Gulf Boulevard.

Demers found the referendum ballot summaries did not meet requirements of state law or the City Charter.

"Obviously, I am gratified with the judge's decision, which was elegant and decisive. If I had been on the other side, I would be less pleased," Pyle said.

He asserted voters were deceived about the real impact of the 2008 comprehensive plan changes. The judge agreed.

"Plaintiff is right. The ordinance misleads voters," the judge ruled, describing one ballot summary as "wordsmithing" and another as "illusory."

The amended comprehensive plan initially was drafted by Save Our Little Village (SOLV), a pro-hotel group that subsequently joined the city in fighting Pyle's attempts to reverse the referendum's results.

There are other suits involving other aspects of the comprehensive plan pending against the city filed by residents Bruce Kadura and Richard McCormick.

Those suits are also before Demers and a ruling on them is expected by the end of the year.

Finnerty said the court ruling and its implications will be discussed at the next regular City Commission meeting Dec. 14, or possibly before if a special workshop is called.

Weiss described the judge's decision as a "vindication."

"All the city and SOLV had to do was tell the citizens the truth. But they hid the real issue — that the proposed comprehensive plan increased height and density on the beach for hotel owners," he said.

Progress Florida's cartoon of the day

Hillsborough's new planning commission chairman looking for ways to ease development restrictions and doing it illegally

http://www.tampabay.com/news/localgovernment/hillsborough-planning-chairmans-ideas-worry-growth-management-advocates/1135198

Hillsborough planning chairman's ideas worry growth-management advocates

By Bill Varian, Times Staff Writer
In Print: Friday, November 19, 2010

TAMPA — A goal-setting memo from the new chairman of the Hillsborough County City-County Planning Commission has put growth management advocates on high alert.

In an e-mail to the agency's executive director last week, Edward Giunta II laid out a series of cost-cutting measures he'd like to pursue. They include removing planning commission review of everything from historic preservation matters to community plans.

Anti-sprawl activists say he's pushing to dismantle some of the key responsibilities for one of the few entities they trust to stand up to unbridled growth.

"I was shocked at the tone of it," said Terry Flott, chairwoman of the United Citizens Action Network. "It's just so inappropriate. He's got an agenda. I actually fear what is his influence is going to do?"

Giunta, a real estate broker who has served on the commission for eight years as an appointee of the city of Tampa, said in the memo to executive director Bob Hunter that he isn't pressing a personal agenda. The e-mail underscores a desire expressed when he took over as chairman Nov. 8 to solicit the goals of other commissioners.

He said his ideas are shaped by a desire to stay ahead of budget cuts that are likely to come due to declines in tax revenue.

"I'm trying to achieve eliminating or reducing staff workload to where we can absorb the budget cuts without having to reduce work force and still maintain all responsibilities of the planning commission," Giunta said Thursday.

In the memo, Giunta also appears to advocate a Sunshine Law violation by asking Hunter to share with him other commissioners' goals outside of a public meeting. Giunta said he was alerted by Hunter and the commission's attorney that would violate state open-meeting laws and withdrew the request, noting that it was an error.

Giunta listed three goals in the Nov. 10 memo. The last one, with the heading "Simplify Overall Process," has activists most alarmed.

It is followed by two specific recommendations: removing community plans from the county's growth guidebook, known as its comprehensive plan, and "elimination of DCA" — the state Department of Community Affairs.

The county has implemented a series of community plans, which specify development rules for a given area and are crafted with residents' input. Giunta said they have been a disaster, taking years of staff time to create and getting shaped mostly by a few activists rather than representing the will of the community affected.

"It has created significant costs," Giunta said. "The name itself is a farce."

They are indeed the bane of developers, who regularly fight them. A number of community plans are in place already and residents from other parts of the county are waiting in line for the opportunity to have them created.

The reason is obvious, said Barbara Aderhold, a former planning commissioner who helped pursue a community plan for the Keystone-Odessa area.

"The communities want them implemented because they want protection from some of the crappy development that has occurred in the county," Aderhold said.

By getting included in the comprehensive plan, changes are permitted only periodically and must undergo multiple public hearings. Taking them out would allow changes at any time with just one hearing.

"I think it would substantially weaken the comprehensive plans," Hunter said.

As for activists' other concern, Giunta said he isn't seeking for the planning commission to push for the elimination of the DCA, which must sign off on changes to comprehensive plans from around the state. But he said he believes that either the Legislature or incoming Gov. Rick Scott will pursue that.

He said he wants the planning commission to figure out how much staff time is devoted to interacting with the DCA so it can prepare if the state agency is eliminated. His memo seeks similar reviews of the planning commission's work in areas where other agencies play a role in the review, from historic preservation to development permits at the Port of Tampa.

Todd Pressman, a government affairs consultant who regularly represents clients seeking changes to development rules, said he believes Giunta is making a reasonable request. And he agrees with his assessment of community plans.

"You may not agree with what he's saying," Pressman said. " To me, he's taking a fresh and new look at what the planning commission should be doing. That's good government."

Bill Varian can be reached at (813) 226-3387 or varian@sptimes.com

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2010/nov/19/MENEWSO3-planning-boss-may-have-violated-sunshine-/news-breaking/

Planning boss may have violated Sunshine Law

By MIKE SALINERO | The Tampa Tribune

The new chairman of the Hillsborough County City-County Planning Commission recently tried to communicate his goals for the coming year to fellow commissioners in an e-mail, an apparent violation of Florida Sunshine laws.

Edward Giunta II sent the e-mail Nov. 10 to the planning commission's executive director, Bob Hunter, and asked Hunter to forward it to the other 12 commissioners. The e-mail included several things Giunta wants to accomplish in the coming year, including eliminating the Florida Department of Community Affairs, the state's growth management agency.

Hunter balked at forwarding the e-mail, saying it would violate open meeting laws. Giunta wanted a second opinion, so he called the commission's attorney, Tracy Robin, who confirmed Hunter's opinion.

"It was clearly a mistake on my part," said Giunta, a real estate broker and developer elected chairman Nov. 8 after three years on the commission. "I thought if I sent something directly to Mr. Hunter to distribute, that made things OK. But when I included my three goals, that's where the problem came in."

The e-mail came to light through a public records request by Terry Flott, chairwoman of the grass-roots group United Citizens Action Network. Flott said she was more concerned about Giunta's opinions about the Department of Community Affairs and planning in general than the possible sunshine violation.

"He's out to destroy planning," she said.

Giunta said the DCA costs counties time and money by reviewing every change to local comprehensive plans. Developers have long complained that the DCA stalls growth, but several efforts by legislators over the years to kill the agency have failed.

This year, however, Gov.-elect Rick Scott complained about the agency on the campaign trail, saying it "impacted people who want to build things" and is "killing jobs."

Giunta said in his e-mail that he also wants to take community-based plans out of the county's comprehensive plan and let the county's Planning and Growth Management Department administer them. Hillsborough has 23 such plans, developed through meetings with residents in the planning area. The plans include goals for guiding growth, as well as design and architectural guidelines.

But Giunta said only five or six activists show up at meetings with planning commission staff to develop the plans, a process that can take several years. Once the plans are adopted by the county commission, their land-use guidelines can stop certain types of developments that the majority of residents might favor, he said. The county commission recently voted to let residents or businesses opt out of the plans, but then reversed the option. "They say they are just visions and goals," Giunta said, "but once you put a community plan into the comp plan, it's no longer a vision."

msalinero@tampatrib.com

(813) 259-8303 

Here's the problem, they don't want to address all of the already allocated residential units

They just rationalize adding more and more density in the name of  the latest catchphrase "walkable commuities"
http://www2.highlandstoday.com/content/2010/nov/16/must-decide-whether-to-appeal-comp-plan/

Must decide whether to appeal comp plan


By GARY PINNELL

Highlands Today

One of the first questions the new commissioners will decide is whether to appeal the state's rejection of Highlands County's comprehensive plan.

Among the county's options:•Schedule an administrative hearing and force the Florida Department of Community Affairs to accept Blue Head Ranch, Lake Placid North and South, and Lake Placid Groves, along with the rest of Evaluation and Appraisal Reports amendments.

•Resubmit the rest of the EARS but leave out the four subdivisions, which DCA has identified as sprawl.

•Go to mediation.

First, said Development Services Director Mark Hill, Highlands County will wait. Three new commissioners will be seated at the Nov. 16 meeting, and the newly elected Gov. Rick Scott, will take office in January. Scott has claimed the DCA kills jobs; the Republican-dominated Legislature has threatened to disband or sunset the agency.

Locally

All three new commissioners first want to educate themselves on the issue and examine the possibilities.

"I don't know yet," said Jack Richie, who will represent District 4, the Lake Placid area. "We need to find out exactly what we have to do, and then look at the cost. And then I think we have to have input from the community."

"As I understand it, and I know I don't have all the information yet, we have no choice but to address DCA's issues, so we can't do nothing," said Don Elwell, who lives in Spring Lake and will represent Lorida and eastern Highlands County. "The extent of the appeal is debatable."

Greg Harris, who will represent Sebring, isn't willing to give up yet.

"I know a lot of work went into it," he said. The EAR amendments include antiquated subdivisions, water supply issues, and how many buildable lots Highlands County needs for the future.

The county has about 200 subdivisions, said planner Don Hanna, which include 85,000 lots. "We have about 55,000 lots available."

However, he added, "we need to remember that these lots have, in most cases, no water or wastewater service. In some cases the roads are not in. They lack the amenities that would foster a mixed use, walkable, modern subdivision. As such, their desirability and marketability is lessened."
Highlands County's EAR amendments would direct new development away from what the planning department calls antiquated subdivisions by limiting building permits. New development should be directed to subdivisions with developer-paid amenities, Hanna said.

Another side

Paula House and other local environmentalists have opposed the four new subdivisions.

A fourth option, House said, would be to propose only the EAR amendments that Highlands County needs to adopt the comprehensive plan required by law. Then, the county could work on Blue Head, Lake Placid North and South, and Lake Placid Groves.

"It seems to me that certain projects are holding it up," House said.

Going to mediation, House said, "suggests these issues are solvable." She doesn't believe they are, with the four subdivisions still in the county's plan. One reason: water.

Two October 2010 water management district letters to DCA "say some pretty shocking things," House said. Planning Manager Ran Frahm wrote that withdrawals from the Floridan Aquifer in the southern part of Southwest Florida Water Management District "have resulted in salt water intrusion, cessation of spring flows, and lowered lake levels."


"How do you mediate that issue?" House asked.